Why did Gerasim drown the dog instead of leaving with her for the village? - briefly
Gerasim, a character from Leo Tolstoy's "The Death of Ivan Ilyich," is portrayed as a man of deep compassion and practicality. Gerasim's actions are driven by a sense of duty and understanding of the harsh realities of life. He recognizes that taking the dog to the village would burden the already struggling peasants there. Instead, he chooses to end the dog's suffering humanely, reflecting his empathy and pragmatic nature.
Gerasim drowned the dog because he understood that the dog would face a harsh and uncertain future in the village, where resources were scarce. This act was a merciful decision to spare the dog from potential hardship and suffering.
Why did Gerasim drown the dog instead of leaving with her for the village? - in detail
Gerasim, a character from Leo Tolstoy's novel "The Death of Ivan Ilyich," is known for his stoic and practical nature. His actions, including the drowning of a dog, are often interpreted through the lens of his character traits and the societal norms of his time. To understand why Gerasim might have drowned the dog instead of taking it to the village, one must consider several factors.
Firstly, Gerasim's character is defined by his simplicity, honesty, and adherence to duty. He is a peasant who values practicality and efficiency. In the rural setting of 19th-century Russia, resources were often scarce, and survival depended on making tough decisions. Gerasim's actions reflect this pragmatic approach to life. Taking a dog to the village would have required additional resources, such as food and care, which might not have been readily available. Moreover, the dog might have been seen as a burden rather than an asset, especially if it was not useful for tasks like hunting or herding.
Secondly, the societal norms and cultural practices of the time also influence Gerasim's actions. In rural Russia, animals were often valued for their utility rather than their companionship. A dog that did not serve a practical purpose might have been considered expendable. Drowning the dog could have been seen as a humane way to end its life, especially if it was sick or injured and could not contribute to the household. This act, though harsh by modern standards, was not uncommon in an era where survival was paramount.
Additionally, Gerasim's sense of duty and responsibility to his master, Ivan Ilyich, might have played a part in his decision. As a servant, Gerasim's primary concern was to fulfill his duties and ensure the well-being of his master. Taking care of a dog would have diverted his attention and resources away from his primary responsibilities. By drowning the dog, Gerasim ensured that he could focus on his duties without additional distractions.
Furthermore, the emotional detachment that Gerasim exhibits is a characteristic of his class and upbringing. Peasants in rural Russia often had to make difficult decisions to ensure their survival and the survival of their families. Emotional attachments to animals, while not unheard of, were often secondary to practical considerations. Gerasim's decision to drown the dog reflects this emotional detachment and his focus on practicality.
In summary, Gerasim's decision to drown the dog instead of taking it to the village can be attributed to his pragmatic nature, the societal norms of his time, his sense of duty, and his emotional detachment. These factors combined create a character who values practicality and efficiency above emotional considerations, reflecting the harsh realities of rural life in 19th-century Russia.